Top Menu

Bryan Fischer Says Muslims Don’t Have First Amendment Rights

Bryan Fischer is a loony anti-Muslim bigot

The anti-Muslim rhetoric continues to increase amongst the right-wing.

Talking Points Memo: Bryan Fischer: Muslims Have No First Amendment Rights by Jillian Rayfield

Bryan Fischer, the “Director of Issues Analysis” for the social conservative group the American Family Association, says that when it comes to Islam, the First Amendment is a privilege, not a right. “Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam,” Fischer wrote today.

“The First Amendment was written by the Founders to protect the free exercise of Christianity. They were making no effort to give special protections to Islam. Quite the contrary,” Fischer wrote on his Renew America blog.

He continued:

Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam. Islam is entitled only to the religious liberty we extend to it out of courtesy. While there certainly ought to be a presumption of religious liberty for non-Christian religious traditions in America, the Founders were not writing a suicide pact when they wrote the First Amendment.

Fischer took it a step further, calling Islam a “treasonous ideology” and adding that “from a constitutional point of view, Muslims have no First Amendment right to build mosques in America. They have that privilege at the moment, but it is a privilege that can be revoked.”

Fischer, also known for his frequent anti-gay, anti-bear rhetoric, has previously called for the U.S. to have “no more mosques, period,” because “every single mosque is a potential terror training center or recruitment center for jihad.” He’s also suggested that we should “handle Muslims just like we handle neo-Nazis.”

And his show is a frequent stomping ground for conservative politicians, including potential 2012 presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, and actual 2012 candidate Tim Pawlenty.

, , , , , ,

  • Link182

    Didn’t the girl who posted that YouTube rant about Japanese people wind up with her academic career terminated? Why hasn’t this guy lost his job?

  • jacque

    NassirH…Any movie based on a book by John Hagee should not be taken seriously. The only people who will take him seriously are Evangelical Christian loons. The problem is that there are a sizable amount of people in America who follow Hagee’s teachings.

    The real scary thought that comes to mind from that trailer is that crazy Christians like Hagee can now make movies. He’s going to be able to influence a larger audience now. If you have ever seen his speeches on youtube, that is very frightening. He spews a lot of hateful rhetoric.

  • corey

    or as I like to call it a christianised “24” I saw this when this one website(forgot its name) had an advertisement with the ad saying “the film muslims dont want you to see” and yes NassrH I might actually view this like the as a comedy as well considering not jack bauer is trying to save the United States from those evil bad true muslims that stacy keaches character refers to.

  • NassirH

    Check out this new movie trailer.

    “The Apocalypse Explains the Middle East: Movie Edition.”

    Straight to DVD?

  • Rob

    Great special. It shows the absolute hatred, ignorance, irrationality and intolerance of these GeehadBob types.

  • “Yet repeated empirical studies have shown regular mosque attendance is a negative-indicator for propensity to commit terrorist acts.”

    Please note that the above comes from a report by SIS (British Security Service, AkA; MI5, think NSA or CIA), useless as they can be at times they *do* know what they are talking about when it comes to terrorism. The report pointed out amongst other things:

    – people who are ‘more religious’ are less likely to be ‘extremists’

    – a high proportion of ‘extremists’ are ‘converts’ which leads to the assumption that they hopped into Islam for the fun of it

    – many of the above ‘converts’ didn’t attend regular Mosque services or have anything to do with the community

    – most became ‘radicalized’ online not at a Mosque or other place

    – a fair number were radicalized in prisons when they had free access to radical Muslims behind bars, again, converts along for the fun of it

    – and to repeat, attendance at a Mosque and involvement with the community lessened ‘radicalization’

    I’m not sure if the report is available to the public but I can check if anyone is interested in having a copy.

  • Khushboo

    Yup, Rob’s right. I don’t like the title but I think that’s just to get attention. CNN’s been pretty pro Islam lately. I said LATELY so don’t get on my case. *ducks*

  • AD

    Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

  • Rob

    Nur Alia,

    It’s suppose to put Muslims in a positive light, and talk about what Muslims are going through here. They’ve been posting articles on Islam for the past week. It’s sure to make the islamophobes cringe and scream louder. Just go to the CNN US edition website.

  • Khushboo

    With loons like this, Republicans are sure to lose next year!

  • Nur Alia


    Just the title makes it seem that Muslims arent welcome in America. I dont know what CNN is going to show, or what thier ‘special’ is even about, but even the title of it sounds biased.

    Sort of like asking ‘Is Islam a Peaceful Religion”.

    I only hope that they display more balanced opinion than the title of the special portrays.

    Of course…we need alot of good Muslim people in Malaysia…where you will always be welcomed

  • Rob

    Just a reminder, there’s going to be a special on CNN called “Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door” at 8pm ET.

  • Dawood
  • Thanks, Percey and Mosizzle, for giving those quotes. I would like to add a few more, to show the absolute absurdity of Bryan Fischer’s statements.

    In a Treaty between the USA and “Tripoli of Barbary”, – written in 1796 toward the end of George Washington’s Presidency, and signed into law in 1797 under John Adam’s administration – this statement is made (in Article 11): “As the government of the United States of America IS NOT IN ANY SENSE FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION – as it has itself no character of enmity against the law, religion or tranquility of MUSSELMEN [MUSLIMS]…“ This was written and signed by some of the very men who signed the US Constitution, so I would presume they knew what sort of government they had established.

    A Baptist minister named John Leland – who refused to support the Constitution until James Madison assured him that it would not in any way restrict religious liberty – had this to say: “…Government has no more to do with the religious opinions of men than it has with the principles of mathematics. Let every man speak freely without fear–maintain the principles that he believes–worship according to his own faith, either one God, three Gods, no God, or twenty Gods; and let government protect him in so doing…” (From a pamphlet entitled: “The Rights of Conscience Inalienable, and Therefore Religious Opinions not Cognizable by Law”.

    And again from the Baptist minister John Leland: “The liberty I contend for is more than toleration. The very idea of toleration is despicable; it supposes that some have a pre-eminence above the rest to grant indulgence; whereas all should be equally free, Jews, Turks [Muslims], Pagans and Christians. Test oaths and established creeds should be avoided as the worst of evils.”

    It’s simply much too late to say that the “founding fathers” simply wanted to establish and protect Christianity. They themselves outright denied that allegation. Some, like Patrick Henry, did want to “establish” a generic Christianity as the official religion; but they were soundly defeated by the overwhelming majority, and our founding documents reflected that.

  • Garo

    The First Amendment was written to protect all religions and belief in any religion,including the belief in Paganism. Anyone who claims it does not protect Islam is a first rate distorter.Period.

  • Crow

    Yeah, yet more wisdom from the POS who said Native Americans are alcoholics and poor because they didnt accept Jesus. I’ll take the Muslims over extremists so-called Christians like you scumbag.

  • Dawood

    Yet repeated empirical studies have shown regular mosque attendance is a negative-indicator for propensity to commit terrorist acts.

  • Nur Alia

    “..every single mosque is a potential terror training center..”

    and, every single church is a potenical centre for unspeakble acts against the innocence of children.

    I am not for banning churches, just banning them within a radius of 500 miles of any school, play yard, public space, amusement park, child care centre, or any other place where children gather.

    This is sarcasm by the way.

  • As Percey points out, such fools are ignorant of their history and the US Constitution and are, in reality, not ‘defenders of the Constitution’ as they like to claim, but instead ‘defenders of the Constitution *as I see it*’. Big difference and I will email that quote to him.

  • Mosizzle

    Good point, Percey. There’s plenty of references to Muslims by the Founding Fathers.

    ” so that even if the Mufti of Constantinople were to send a missionary to preach Mohammedanism to us, he would find a pulpit at his service.”
    — Benjamin Franklin

  • mindy1

    Isn’t this the same nut who wanted our soldiers to be killing more people?? 🙁

  • jacque

    This is part of his ignorant blabber from the link provided in the post:

    “The real object of the amendment was, not to countenance, much less to advance Mahometanism, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity; but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects”

    It seems to me that he is not just anti-Muslim, but also anti-Jewish. It is because of the second part that he will be condemned in the media. Had he been only the former, his statements would have not have been condemned in the mainstream press. He certainly will not be invited to Fox News numerous times to spread his hatred like Pamela Geller has been.

    AJ has a great point. People like Pamela Geller have fostered an environment, through their hateful rhetoric, that is not only dangerous to Muslims, but to Jews like themselves. When you preach hate, you cannot control the endgame. The haters will come for every minority in the end, especially as the economy continues to deteriorate. Remember, as people have less money in their pockets, they will need someone to blame.

  • AJ

    Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, the instigators of all this hate don’t get it yet but in the end as is apparent from Fischer’s statement, all this campaigning against Muslims will take away their (Jews’) and every other minority religion’s rights as well.

  • Sulayman F

    “every single mosque is a potential terror training center”

    …and every single man is a potential rapist. Slippery slope argument?

  • Percey

    “”Where the preamble [of the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom] declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting the words “Jesus Christ,” so that it should read, “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.”
    -Thomas Jefferson

Powered by Loon Watchers